Burnham v. Superior Court Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Burnham v. Superior Court | 495 U.S. 604 (1990)

Personal jurisdiction is a court’s power over the parties to a case. Without it, any judgment is void. Under International Shoe Company versus Washington, constitutional due process requires a state court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction to satisfy traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. This demands that the defendant have sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state.

Sufficient contacts exist if the litigation arises from the defendant’s activities in or toward the forum state. This establishes specific jurisdiction. Or, if the defendant’s continuous and systematic presence in the forum state justifies suing it there for any reason, the forum court will have general jurisdiction over the defendant.

Yet the longstanding practice of transient jurisdiction establishes personal jurisdiction if the defendant is personally served with process while physically present in the forum state, regardless of contacts. In Burnham versus Superior Court of California, the United States Supreme Court considered whether transient jurisdiction satisfies traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice in the modern world.

In 1976, Dennis and Francie Burnham married in West Virginia. A year later, they moved to New Jersey, where they had children. In 1987, Francie and the children moved to California, while Dennis remained a New Jersey resident.

In 1988, Francie commenced divorce proceedings in California state court. Soon after, Dennis traveled to California to conduct business and visit the children, as he had done several times. There, Francie had Dennis personally served with divorce papers.

Dennis moved to dismiss for want of personal jurisdiction, contending that he lacked sufficient minimum contacts with California. Dennis had no continuous or systematic presence there, and the marriage occurred in West Virginia. The trial court denied the motion, holding that transient jurisdiction existed because Dennis was personally served with process while present in California. The California Court of Appeal affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted cert.

#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

[RICKYMUNDAY]

Specific Jurisdiction could be said to be alien age Jurisdiction. If the Plaintiff from somewhere else comes to make a claim to the court and act as his own attorneys has failed. The membership of citizen, The United States Citizen cannot bring a claim against his own membership.

Government agents enjoy a protection of judicial authority because they [government agents] collect a pension to use En-force-ment stops as a source of the revenue.... That is the trickle down, as they toss their runny lard out the of the window from the side dungeons below Scottish Castle...